NBC "Meet the Press" - Transcript: Interview with Rep. Hakeem Jeffries

Interview

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

CHUCK TODD:

And joining me now is Congressman Hakeem Jeffries of New York, a member of the Democratic leadership on the House side. Congressman, welcome to Meet the Press.

REP. HAKEEM JEFFRIES:

Good morning. Good to be here.

CHUCK TODD:

Okay, government's open. President Trump caved. Democrats won this fight. You heard Kevin McCarthy say, "I don't know what you won. You won status quo." So let me ask you this. In three weeks, how are we not in the same spot?

REP. HAKEEM JEFFRIES:

Well, I think it's important to understand that the legislative branch, at the end of the day, are stewards of managing public money. We can either manage that money efficiently, or we can waste taxpayer dollars. We concluded that spending billions on a medieval border wall that would be ineffective would be a waste of taxpayer dollars. That's a fifth-century solution to a 21st-century problem. What we want to support over the next few weeks is 21st-century border security. And so we're willing to invest in additional infrastructure, particularly as it relates to our legal ports of entry, which, as you know, Chuck, is the place where the majority of drugs come in. We're willing to invest in personnel. We're willing to invest in additional technology.

CHUCK TODD:

Is--Do you think a fence is medieval?

REP. HAKEEM JEFFRIES:

Well, I think that from the standpoint of building a concrete barrier from sea to shining sea--

CHUCK TODD:

He took that off the table. Is that to you progress?

REP. HAKEEM JEFFRIES:

That's progress. And hopefully he'll stick to that position that he's taken. Now, in the past, we have supported, as you know, enhanced fencing. And I think that's something that's reasonable that should be on the table. But I don't want to get out ahead of the process because there's a process that has been put in place. We've appointed distinguished members of the Appropriations Committee. And as you know, Chuck, there are three types of members of Congress: Democrats, Republicans, and appropriators. I think the appropriators can get this done.

CHUCK TODD:

Obviously this is a-- it's actually harkening back to how we thought a bill was to become a law. There's a Senate bill, there's a House bill, and you see if you can come to a compromise. Let me ask you this. If that compromise is something that doesn't have a majority of Democrats but has a good chunk of them in the House, it can get through the Senate, and that's what happens, can you imagine Democrats in the House allowing a bill on the floor that a majority of Democrats didn't support but could get some-- but could get through the Senate and to the president's signature?

REP. HAKEEM JEFFRIES:

Well, the only thing that I could imagine is making sure that there's a bill that comes to the floor that's evidence-based in terms of securing our borders. And I think that has been our perspective from the very beginning, along with the principle that shutdowns are not legitimate negotiating tactics when there's a public policy disagreement between two branches of government.

CHUCK TODD:

You just heard Kevin McCarthy come out and essentially endorse a bill that would eliminate the ability to do a shutdown that would--non-political-appointee government workers. And he basically said, "You want to do it? Make sure the legislative branch doesn't get paid." And I think that's the Mark Warner bill. Is that bipartisan compromise? Is this something we could see happen? At least the never-have-a-shutdown act?

REP. HAKEEM JEFFRIES:

Well, Kevin McCarthy's a good man. But that seems to me to be a gimmick. The most important thing is making sure that we never hold hostage hardworking public servants--

CHUCK TODD:

But do you want to legislate that, to make it so it can't be done anymore?

REP. HAKEEM JEFFRIES:

I think we should take a hard look at making sure that we don't pursue shutdowns as a means of trying to extract leverage, whether that's a Democratic president or a Republican president.

CHUCK TODD:

Let me go back on what I was trying to get at. The Republicans infamously had something called the Hastert Rule that referred to the idea, the former speaker of the House who's got his own, that if a majority of the majority party didn't support a bill, they'd never put it on the floor. Do the Democrats--the new Democratic majority have that same-- is there going to be a version of an unofficial rule like that?

REP. HAKEEM JEFFRIES:

Well, we haven't taken that position. We have taken a position that we do want to work in a bipartisan way and want to do it in particular on behalf of our for-the-people agenda. We've said we're going to fight hard for lower health care costs, to increase pay for everyday Americans, strengthen the Affordable Care Act, protect people with preexisting conditions, enact a real infrastructure plan. We want to do that in a bipartisan way. Trillion-dollar infrastructure plan. We think it'll create 16 million good-paying jobs. Republicans, Democrats, even the president has supported the notion that we've got to fix our broken infrastructure.

CHUCK TODD:

So you didn't quite answer the question. You haven't decided whether that will be a rule or not?

REP. HAKEEM JEFFRIES:

We have not had that discussion in caucus --

CHUCK TODD:

Okay.

REP. HAKEEM JEFFRIES:

--but we have discussed proceeding in a strongly bipartisan way on issues of importance to the American people.

CHUCK TODD:

I want to have you see if you can respond to something that Speaker Pelosi said in response to the Roger Stone indictment. Take a listen. Or excuse me. Let me put it up here on screen. She said, "In the face of 37 indictments, the president's continued actions to undermine the special counsel investigation raise the questions: what does Putin have on the president politically, personally, or financially?" She asked that question somewhat rhetorically. There are some Democrats that are anxious to begin an impeachment inquiry today. At what point do you think it's appropriate?

REP. HAKEEM JEFFRIES:

Well, it's certainly not appropriate right now. We do have a constitutional responsibility pursuant to Article One to serve as a check and balance on an out-of-control executive branch. We take that responsibility seriously. However, we're not going to over-investigate. We're not going to over-politicize. We're not going to overreach as it relates to that solemn constitutional responsibility. What are going to do is make sure we focus on the issues of importance to the American people. That's why Elijah Cummings is having a hearing this week on how we can lower the high cost of prescription drugs. That's why Richard Neal, the chair of Ways and Means, is having a hearing this week on protecting people with preexisting conditions.

CHUCK TODD:

Right. But I think Congressman Cummings is also starting an oversight investigation on security clearances that seem to have at least some connection to the Mueller probe.

REP. HAKEEM JEFFRIES:

Well, as I mentioned, we are going to take that responsibility seriously. I think the American people want to see checks and balances. We are a separate and coequal branch of government. We don't work for Donald Trump. We work for the American people.

CHUCK TODD:

Let me ask you this. I'm going to put up a tweet of yours. And you've been tweeting, you've been referring to the president not as the president in your tweets. You refer to him as "Individual 1." Let me put up one here, for instance, from last week. "For decades, Individual 1 made a living stiffing his workers and contractors. And now he's doing it to 800,000 federal employees and contractors. We must end reckless Trump shutdown and continue our fight for the people." You refer to him as Individual 1. Obviously it's something having to do with the Mueller probe. You called him the "grand wizard." It seems--You're a member of leadership. What's that line in your mind? Why should the president negotiate with you if you're going to name call him? I know he name calls. Why should he negotiate with you if you're going to name call him?

REP. HAKEEM JEFFRIES:

Well, listen, it's colorful language. And I think that the president is going to have to own his pattern of behavior that has taken place not year after year, but decade after decade. But I do believe that we do need to find a way together to move forward, Democrats and Republicans. And in fact, Chuck, as you know, I was able to work with the administration on criminal justice reform. Democrats, Republicans, progressives, conservatives, the left, and the right. If we can do it on criminal justice reform, I think we can find a way to move forward.

CHUCK TODD:

Do you regret your language or no?

REP. HAKEEM JEFFRIES:

I don't regret the use of the language, but I do think we need to move forward. Listen, America is a great country. We've come a long way on the question of race. We still have a long way to go. At the end of the day, we're a nation of immigrants. Some voluntary, others involuntary. I think it was Dr. King who said, "We all came on the same-- different ships, but we're in the same boat right now." I think that's the way to proceed.

CHUCK TODD:

All right. Hakeem Jeffries, new member of the House Democratic leadership. Good to see you on the show, sir.

REP. HAKEEM JEFFRIES:

Good to see you, Chuck.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source